Update 90, January 2018 has been published. Contents include:
Equity Enforces Promises That the Law Does Not: Cowper-Smith v. Morgan, SCC
Courts Play a Critical Role in Safeguarding Treaty Rights: SCC
Land Titles and Personal Property Registry Changes: Notices and Directives
I found the Cowper-Smith decision of personal interest. When families no longer live close to aging parents, one sibling can be required to take on more caretaking duties than others, and there should be a way to guarantee recognition for this, especially, as in this case, where an oral agreement was in place.
Trial delays are a long-standing issue in the justice system. The latest amendment to Manitoba’s Queen’s Bench Rules, effective January 1, 2018, addresses that head on. A recent Alberta Court of Appeal decision, Humphreys v. Trebilcock, 2017 ABCA 116 (leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed) thoroughly examines this issue.
The plaintiffs commenced their action, a claim that the defendants engaged in fraudulent business practices, on December 14, 2006. A trial would not likely take place until 2020.
 The plaintiffs have not provided a satisfactory excuse to account for their failure to press their action ahead with reasonable expedition. They do not allege that the defendants have engaged in acts either intended or having the effect of interfering with the ordinary advance of the action.
 Has the inordinate and inexcusable delay for which the plaintiffs are responsible impaired an important interest of the defendants? If so, is it sufficiently important to justify an order dismissing the plaintiffs’ action?
 The moving parties have proved that it is more likely than not that the nonmoving parties’ inordinate and inexcusable delay has caused them nonlitigation and litigation prejudice.